1) I think I would call that a soft-fork, that induces a reorg.
2) The situation isn't extremely clear to me (details of the double spend? How is it related?), but I suppose it would be inconsequential for the old nodes (assuming there isn't a reorg that happens when miners switched back to the old chain)
3) is interesting: is the gossip protocol part of consensus? I suppose this would create a hardfork, since new/old nodes cannot talk easily
What if it was called a "security fee" instead of a "transaction fee"? #bitcoin
Bitcoin and quantum computers are two fields of study that I think are foreign to the vast majority of people, so maybe this is why there is so much confusion and hysteria about the two every so often.
This is a great post that addresses both the technical details, and the wider social/network implications:
I feel like this is probably a marketing stunt, but even still, wow. Absolute inanity.
This article is interesting, but if nothing else just hit the link and scroll down until you see the flashing red/blue square gifs, and then read the paragraph or two right above those for an explanation. Its a really cool optical phenomenon!
One anecdotal reason I think the lightning network will be successful:
Every time I need to make a small BTC payment lately, my first instinct is to now see if I can send it via lightning.
This is beneficial to me because:
- Less fees, no need to pull up Johoe's mempool visualizer (my fav place to check out the current blockspace market)
- No need to consider UTXO management (privacy, efficient fee-rate planning, etc)
So if you want my sats, I guess you'd better accept lightning payments :p
My answer: ~3 years until I set up a node.
It seems absurd now, but the first wallet I used was blockchain.info. An easy web login trumped a command line installation.
Don't underestimate convenience as a (de)motivator! And the tinfoil-hatters on btcTalk can paint a scary picture of hackers coming for your coins...
(for the record, I went to *great* lengths to create secure logins and backups. I'm not sure you could use bc.info in a more 'secure manner' than I devised hahaha :p)
Bitcoin twitter is riled up because a well-known podcaster admitted to not running their own node. I bet more 'notable bitcoiners' are guilty of this than most people think!
So here's a question: how long after acquiring your first bit of bitcoin did you set a node up? I bet only a select group of highly technical people went node->acquire BTC.
Still in the no-node group? Speak up, and let someone help you get one going! Claw back some sovereignty, join the revolution.
It'd be frustrating to be working for a biz that is creating useless blockchain-hype products. At least once the hype dries up, people like this will have some knowledge that is transferable to building more viable (Bitcoin) tech.
I think this is a really stupid take, but I do also think there is a sliver of truth to the BTC part: privacy at the protocol level is important! If we end up in a future of white/blacklisted coins that will be really, really bad.
Also... something about ETH and infura servers shutting down.. lol! (and let’s not even start on ETH privacy, that is a very sad topic)
I wish LND had better UTXO management tools. I'd like to spend a certain UTXO entirely to create a channel, but that seems almost impossible to do.
Hmm, I guess the next best option is to have a very small change output leftover, rather than consume additional UTXOs just to cover the miner fees..
Being able to specify a certain UTXO, and then set the local_amt to (max - miner fees) would be great!
techno sapien demands techno sovereignty
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!